The Sun TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1916. THE TARIFF CONTROVERSY.

Sun (Christchurch), Volume III, Issue 826, 3 October 1916, Page 6

The Sun TUESDAY, OCTOBER 3, 1916. THE TARIFF CONTROVERSY.

Since Mr Frostick's inaugural address ;il the public meeting convened

by the Hoard of Industries on the 21st tilt., (here has been a good deal of discussion regarding the tariff, and a learned Freelradc professor has been called in by a conlempo-: ran, lo express an opinion on the controversy so far as il has gone. In his view tiie exponents of Cobdenism have had the best of the argument— which is precisely what one' would expect a Freetrader to say. 1 But after all, an academic discussion between protagonists of Freclradc. and Protection, though interesting,' is of little practical importance at this stage of the world's industrial and economic development. Protection is the fixed and settled policy 'of the leading nations of (he world, except Britain, and as flic result of the war even Britain has departed from il by clapping heavy duties on j ; il kinds of manufactured imports.! Incidentally Protection was adopted a great many years ago in New Zea-I land, and it is .about as reasonable and practicable lo talk of abolishing if as it would be lo agitate for [he repeal of the Labour laws or advo-| cafe the abolition of the Arbitration j Act. These measures are restrictive; and protective in the highest degree.': They destroyed Fret trade in labour by creating a set of artificial conditions which employers must comply with irrespective of what it costs. : If there is to be any return to free-' trade in 'commodities, there must necessarily be a reversion to freedom 1 of contract in regard to labour, and the position only requires to be I staled to satisfy anyone of average; intelligence lhat the worker has no greater enemy than the rabid Freetrader who in his devotion to a liseal delusion would tear; the country's manufacturing indus-j tries up by the rools. As a matter I

of fact, practically the only persons; with the temerity to publicly advocate Freetradc are the single! tax. cranks who would transfer all taxation to the land and regard import duties as a bar to the consuin-j million of this hare-brained ideal.! The real liscal issue is not one of Freetradc and Protection, but of Protection and more Protection. And here, we freely admit. I here is room for considerable divergence of opinion. Protection, like the Arbitration Act, can be grossly abused, but thai it not the fault of principle;' il is the fault of the politicians who!

devise imperfect legislation and are weak in Diallers of administration. In the interests of the community Protection cannot be allowed to be-l come a device for the protection of manufacturers from the consequences of indifferent management,! obsolete plants, excessive distribution expenses, and a weak acceptance ofj unreasonable demands by trade j unionists simply because Ihe employer knows they can be passed on to I the consumer. The true basis of Ihei protective principle is protection! against the competition of foreign 1 manufacturers who are able to explod ihe labour of persons whose! standard of living is so low thai they! are prepared to accept what wei would regard as "starvation" wages. Protection does not absolve the local. manufacturers from the obligation of. making the fullest use of the most: modern and up-to-date methods of manufacturing and distributing! goods. Unfortunate!) some of our local manufacturers seem to think that il does. In Ihe hoot and woollen trades there is a multiplicity of plants, an absence of specialisation,! and a wasteful competition in selling that ought to be corrected by Ihei manufacturers themselves before they ask for any increased prolec-! lion. Tiie same slate of attains applies in, perhaps, a less striking do-! gree lo other industries, and when the iariif comes up for revision Ihe point is not likely lo be overlooked by the farmers' political rcprcsenla-: lives;. What is reall,\ wanted is some propel ly constituted authority, \vhi< hj would have Ihe power lo make an investigation into Ihe conditions of existing industries and furnish Parliament with reports which would be a guide lo il in readjusting Ihe present duties. This is work which might very well come within Ihe scope of a properly organised Department of Industries and Com-i ntercc, working tinder Ihe direction nl a Minister of Trade and Commerce.

Yesterday a number o ' people rang up The Sun to have verified or disproved a rumour current about town that the 15th Reinforcement had [been sunk in the Mediterranean Sea. The story was very persistently circulated, though it is utterly untrue, and it is just as well that talkative individuals should understand thai (they are liable to be fined or imprisoned for spreading mischievous tales of .this sort, and in these days of lengthy casualty lists the authorities would be inclined to deal sharply with an offender, and would be justified in doing so. The public may rest assured that in the event of any accident lo the reinforcements the next-of-kin of those on board the transport will be notified first, even as they are the first to receive news of casualties in France and elsewhere. What the next-of-kin or the newspapers do not know in this respect, the man in the street cannot possibly have any knowledge of, and jlhis fact should be borne in mind when rumour breathing tragedy is at large in the town. The probable 'origin of the story connected with, I the Fifteenths is a recent claim from I Berlin that a German submarinesank | a loaded transport in the MeditcrIranean. If that were true, it could ! not possibly have been the Fit*-; tecnths, for a C.hrislchurch citizen,' who has a son on board the transport, yesterday received a cable to 1 [he effect that the men had arrived at a certain destination. This should! kill the cruel rumour outright.